• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans Shut Out of Stimulus Conference Negotiations

:lol:


Anything from any real sites?

Come on, Rev. Look, it is neither a surprise nor improper for one party to shut the other out. In fact, it is routine and simply an exercise of legislative power. Look, the Democrats won and they are going to craft the stimulus bill as they want to.

The Dems are making a strategic political mistake. When this stimulus fails to do any of what the Dems are promising it will do the Dems will not be able to hide under the bipartisanship banner no matter that losers like Snowe, Collins, and Spectre are playing hangers-on.

I'm actually happy that the Dems are shutting out Republican members. It simply puts the lie to the Obama claims that he's open to bipartisanship and it lets us hang this iron anvil from their necks. The Republicans couldn't fundmamentally alter this spending bill anyway and pecking at the edges only gives the Dems a political advantage.

Obama promised change, he has shown none

Of course, on this point, you are correct.
 
shows how little the Republican run congress actually cared about Bi-partisanship and oversight.

They possess the same level of care about bipartisanship and oversight as the Democrats do.

Your point is...what?

It seems to be that the Republicans are so much worse than the Democrats. You could argue that based on your actual policy preferences, but not when discussing the exercise of political power.

Look, we have Pelosi very opely declaring that she has no use for bipartisanship...and why would she? She and the Dems believe that they were awarded a broad political mandate.

I'm not sure why you're playing this little game, Pete.
 
Your rhetorical vomit has no limits, eh?

Homsexual jihad? Are you serious? Do you not have any rhetorical restraint? So you see some level of equivalence between Muslims terrorists killing civilians and Republicans possessing a moral judgment against homsexuality? What are they doing to you people there in the EU?

Hey jihad is only another word for crusade. Not my problem you find it insulting or whatever.

As for the US rights treatment of the homosexual community?.. Open your eyes. Prop 8, banning books with supposed homosexual references to denying homosexual couples the same rights as hetro sexual couples.. yes the religious right in the Republican party and hence the Republican party are in a jihad against the homosexual community.. or if you would rather have I can use the word crusade if that is less offensive.

Given that no such jihad exist your feigned surprise is meaningless. The WH can grant a pass to who ever the hell they want to.

Yes they can, and you still dont find it odd that a man with fake papers got access to the press room for years, and was allowed time and time again to ask snowball questions to among others President Bush. Either there was a monumental cluster**** that was repeated time and time again, or he was "let in" by the people in power.

Rather, the only thing you care about is that a pro-Republican individual was at all allowed into the WH press room.

I could care less if he was a pro-republican or pro-democrat person. The point is, that the right can not claim lack of bi-partisanship by the democrats when them, themselves for years did very little to act bi-partisan themselves, and in fact "stacked" the deck in their favour and this Gannon guy is just one example.

Meanwhile, I have not seen you express any outrage or surprise that Obama prescreens and preselectes journalists before conducting a presser.

So? Bush did the same, when he actually held a presser. He also stacked all events with "his people". This is a widely known fact about your dear leader. Again I dont have a big issue with it, but you cant go around claiming that a presser is "open" and free, when we all know it is not. I have not heard that Obama claims this.

The only thing wrong with it was that Gannon was able to successfully dupe a press room official into granting a credential. Beyond that all we have is your vapid rhetorical vomit all over the floor here.

Yes finaly you admit that was wrong, but you do not go further to ask why it happened.. Someone duped... for years? I mean how stupid do you think we all are? By your claim, anyone with no relation to any media organisation, can get a press pass on a fake name and enter the same room as the US president.... YEA RIGHT!... Guess under the Bush administration, all the terrorists had to do was get a White House press pass to assassinate the US president.. DAMN they are dumb.
 
They possess the same level of care about bipartisanship and oversight as the Democrats do.

Your point is...what?

It seems to be that the Republicans are so much worse than the Democrats. You could argue that based on your actual policy preferences, but not when discussing the exercise of political power.

Look, we have Pelosi very opely declaring that she has no use for bipartisanship...and why would she? She and the Dems believe that they were awarded a broad political mandate.

I'm not sure why you're playing this little game, Pete.

Because the right on these boards and the Republicans in the media are crying like babies that there is no Bi-Partisanship. Of course there is no bi-partisanship after a decade in the political wilderness.. why should there be? After all it is the Republicans fault that the whole country is in the crapper.
 
As for the US rights treatment of the homosexual community?.. Open your eyes. Prop 8....
You know that the California amendment that banned same-sex marriage was passed primarly on the support of blacks and hispanics that came out to vote for Obama -- right?
 
Because the right on these boards and the Republicans in the media are crying like babies that there is no Bi-Partisanship. Of course there is no bi-partisanship after a decade in the political wilderness.. why should there be? .
So... when The Obama and the Dems campaigned on 'changing the partisan nature of Washington' -- did they lie?

After all it is the Republicans fault that the whole country is in the crapper
^^^^
There exists no better example of rabid partisan bigotry, intellectual dishonesty and willful ignorance than this.
 
The Dems are making a strategic political mistake. I'm actually happy that the Dems are shutting out Republican members. It simply puts the lie to the Obama claims that he's open to bipartisanship and it lets us hang this iron anvil from their necks. .

Obama took office hoping to unite the parties in a bipartisan government. He went to Congress, met with Republicans, even had them over to the White House for cookies. He asked for their ideas and set up a framework to work together. But the Republicans don't want to work together. They rejected Obama and then claimed they were "shut out". This president has and continues to make a serious effort to include Republicans. Republicans have decided they don't want to be included, they want to be a government in exile.
 
Come on, Rev. Look, it is neither a surprise nor improper for one party to shut the other out. In fact, it is routine and simply an exercise of legislative power. Look, the Democrats won and they are going to craft the stimulus bill as they want to.

The Dems are making a strategic political mistake. When this stimulus fails to do any of what the Dems are promising it will do the Dems will not be able to hide under the bipartisanship banner no matter that losers like Snowe, Collins, and Spectre are playing hangers-on.

I'm actually happy that the Dems are shutting out Republican members. It simply puts the lie to the Obama claims that he's open to bipartisanship and it lets us hang this iron anvil from their necks. The Republicans couldn't fundmamentally alter this spending bill anyway and pecking at the edges only gives the Dems a political advantage.


If you read back, we agree. ;)



Of course, on this point, you are correct.



Of course, I am.;)
 
This is probably the closest thread that I've found today to bring up another point: It's not only the Republicans who are shut out of the opportunity to review the so-called "stimulus package". All American political pundits, interested citizens, and also open-minded Democrats (big assumption there) are denied adequate time to read and review the final bill (or recent drafts) that they will vote on very shortly. This is a demonstration of Pelosi's and Read's (likely with Obama's approval) big lie to the American people. Campaign rhetoric had the Democrats promising that all legislation would be out in the open, available to be read and reviewed before voting took place. This bill is being withheld not only from Republican politicians, but from all Americans. All we hear are rumors of a possible healthcare IT package thrown in at a time when the urgency of the need for this so-called stimulus might allow dangerous legislation to sneak in without adequate review. There are many truly moderate Democrats that might vote against some of the individual proposals of the bill if they were separated and clarified to the public beforehand.
 
This is probably the closest thread that I've found today to bring up another point: It's not only the Republicans who are shut out of the opportunity to review the so-called "stimulus package". All American political pundits, interested citizens, and also open-minded Democrats (big assumption there) are denied adequate time to read and review the final bill (or recent drafts) that they will vote on very shortly. This is a demonstration of Pelosi's and Read's (likely with Obama's approval) big lie to the American people. Campaign rhetoric had the Democrats promising that all legislation would be out in the open, available to be read and reviewed before voting took place. This bill is being withheld not only from Republican politicians, but from all Americans. All we hear are rumors of a possible healthcare IT package thrown in at a time when the urgency of the need for this so-called stimulus might allow dangerous legislation to sneak in without adequate review. There are many truly moderate Democrats that might vote against some of the individual proposals of the bill if they were separated and clarified to the public beforehand.




Yes this is the most appalling aspect of the Princess Pelosi Regieme.

Where can you or I go to read this bill in its entirety?
 
Hey jihad is only another word for crusade. Not my problem you find it insulting or whatever.

Why do you think my problem is being offended by your characterization of a moral judgment as a jihad? Do you regularly invent what others have posted?

I simply noted the absurdity of characterizing an individual's moral judgment about homsexuality as the equivalent of holy war.

Why couldn't you address why you characterized it as a jihad or saw some commonality there?

As for the US rights treatment of the homosexual community?..

What? Who is talking about rights?

There you go, again, just inventing something that was not stated or even suggested.

Open your eyes.

Another invention.

What is compelling you to invent things that I didn't say or suggest?

Prop 8, banning books with supposed homosexual references to denying homosexual couples the same rights as hetro sexual couples.. yes the religious right in the Republican party and hence the Republican party are in a jihad against the homosexual community.. or if you would rather have I can use the word crusade if that is less offensive.

First, Republicans are not singularly or uniquely responsible for passing legislation or voting for referendums deyning benefits to homsexual partnes or banning books. Republicans are not denying rights to homosexual. Republicans are arguing whether such rights exist in the first place and, secondly, present arguments about policy.

Why do you think that this constitutes something equivalent to a terrorist blowing up ordinary civilians?

Yes they can, and you still dont find it odd that a man with fake papers got access to the press room for years, and was allowed time and time again to ask snowball questions to among others President Bush.

I don't find it odd. I find your feigned shock as odd.

Either there was a monumental cluster**** that was repeated time and time again, or he was "let in" by the people in power.

Monumental cluster? Why the hysterical characterization?

I could care less if he was a pro-republican or pro-democrat person. The point is, that the right can not claim lack of bi-partisanship by the democrats when them, themselves for years did very little to act bi-partisan themselves, and in fact "stacked" the deck in their favour and this Gannon guy is just one example.

Well, Gannon ain't an example of stacking the deck. The WH press corps was hardly comprised of Bush appointees. :roll:

Second, the Republicans can complain all they want about the lack of bipartisanship, especially when the party in control bemoaned the lack of such and campaigned explicitly on the idea that they would reintroduce bipartisanship.

Do you think that the Republicans lack of bipartisanship when they were in control somehow lets Obama and Co. off the hook for not practicing what they preached for two years?

So? Bush did the same, when he actually held a presser. He also stacked all events with "his people".

Link? Evidence at all?

Of course not. Just more rhetorical vomit.

I'm not criticizing Obama for preselecting journalists. I was merely pointing out that your complaints about such stacking were a surprise given that you had not at all commented on Obama doing it just this week.

This is a widely known fact about your dear leader. Again I dont have a big issue with it, but you cant go around claiming that a presser is "open" and free, when we all know it is not. I have not heard that Obama claims this.

Did Bush ever claim it?

There you go, again, just inventing crap to make a completely meaningless point.

Yes finaly you admit that was wrong,

Wow! Hold the presses! :roll:

I was not admitting I was wrong. I was merely stating the only problem here was the issuance of a credential to someone using a fake name. BFD!

but you do not go further to ask why it happened.. Someone duped... for years?

Oh, I have. Unlike you, though, I don't simply invent grand conspiracies to explain how Gannon got in there at all.

I mean how stupid do you think we all are?

There you go, again. Why do you think that I believe you are stupid?

By your claim, anyone with no relation to any media organisation, can get a press pass on a fake name and enter the same room as the US president.... YEA RIGHT!...

Really? I said that?

Didn't I just acknowledge that there was a problem with granting a credential to someone using a fake name?

I thought you applauded me for that?

But then you turn around and invent the above?

Guess under the Bush administration, all the terrorists had to do was get a White House press pass to assassinate the US president.. DAMN they are dumb.

~Sheesh~ You're worse than Navy Pride and American with this nonsense.

Anyone else have this problem with Pete?
 
Exactly. Obama reached out by baming Republicans for this economy, when he had an integral part in the policies that led to the mortgage crisis.


Pelosi changes house rules that Republicans put in to allow alternative bills to be introduced...


You mean like that?
Face it, the reason Republicans weren't included was the Democrats didn't want the details to get to the public and did not want any desent.
 
Because the right on these boards and the Republicans in the media are crying like babies that there is no Bi-Partisanship. Of course there is no bi-partisanship after a decade in the political wilderness.. why should there be? After all it is the Republicans fault that the whole country is in the crapper.

Pete, do you have a problem reading?

Didn't you just see me post to Rev that there should have been no expectation of bipartisanship despite the years-long promises of Obama and the Democrats?

Besides, the Republicans are not the only ones complaining that Obama has clearly reversed himself on a core campaign promise of restoring bipartisanship.

Blue dog Democrats in the Congress, more than 50, have been hammering Reid and Pelosi for not only shutting out Republicans, but whole swaths of Democrats as the Dem leadership in each chamber have sequestered themselves in drafting legislation.

Dude, you are in no position here to say much at all.

You're either lying or engaging in extremely partisan hackery.
 
Obama took office hoping to unite the parties in a bipartisan government. He went to Congress, met with Republicans, even had them over to the White House for cookies. He asked for their ideas and set up a framework to work together. But the Republicans don't want to work together. They rejected Obama and then claimed they were "shut out". This president has and continues to make a serious effort to include Republicans. Republicans have decided they don't want to be included, they want to be a government in exile.

We have another liar.
 
Obama took office hoping to unite the parties in a bipartisan government. He went to Congress, met with Republicans, even had them over to the White House for cookies. He asked for their ideas and set up a framework to work together. But the Republicans don't want to work together. They rejected Obama and then claimed they were "shut out". This president has and continues to make a serious effort to include Republicans. Republicans have decided they don't want to be included, they want to be a government in exile.

Sorry, W.Rock, but bipartisanship does not mean that one party (i.e. Republicans) is forced to give up its principles and suck up to the head hauchos (i.e. Obama, Pelosi, Reid.) on just about every issue, silently watching (maybe even feign cheering on) the other party (i.e. Democrats) pass legislation that they believe is destructive to liberty and the security of their country. Obama and the Democrats must be willing to bend at least some to have true bipartisanship - I haven't seen that yet in practice (only lip service). Now, I agree with all those who have said "screw bipartisanship" and lay your cards on the table. That's what the Dems need to do, although they must fear what the American public would really think if all their hold cards (and their true motives) were exposed!
 
Bipartisanship requires compromise. Which group is unwilling to compromise?
 
Who put the tax cuts in the stimulus bill?

The Republicans, because they actually are interested in stimulating the economy by helping the more productive (i.e. taxpaying) citizens to provide jobs by making investment capital available... unlike the Democrats who just can't seem to get enough power. What a Pandora's box American voters have opened! God help us!
 
Bush took office hoping to unite the parties in a bipartisan government. He went to Congress, met with Democrats, even had them over to the White House for cookies. He asked for their ideas and set up a framework to work together. But the Democrats didn't want to work together. They rejected Bush and then claimed they were "shut out". This president has and continues to make a serious effort to include Democrats. Democrats had decided they didn't want to be included, they wanted to be a government in exile.

Google, "the new tone".

I think the big issue here is that we're seeing a repeat of GWB here and yet this is coming from a candidate that ran on a platform of "change". That platform is forever going to haunt him and his actions from here on out when he realizes why GWB did some of the things he did.

However, whether or not someone wants to play politics this bill is irresponsible. There is little debate on it even among Democrats. Its being rushed through at an unprecedented speed through the House and Senate for a spending bill of this size. The fact that the revised bill that will voted on today (friday 1/13) has not been released to the public should be a huge issue. I mean, this isn't a national security issue. We ought to be able to redress any greviences with our representitives over a bill such as this, shouldn't we?

This feels like one of those, "bend over and take it, because we know whats best for you" by the government.
 
Bipartisanship requires compromise. Which group is unwilling to compromise?

Apparently the Democrats.

They are the ones arguing that opponents of this bill are proposing to do nothing. That lie was so egregious that even the fawning media called Obama on it.

They are the ones playing the fearmongering game arguing that we need this bill immediately to avoid another Great Depression despite the economic indicators (e.g., unemployment) suggesting that this recession is milder than those of the last 25 years let alone remotely approaching Great Depression status.

They are the ones arguing that opposition to this bill is petty political grievances (see Obama).

They are the ones dearly hanging onto the idea that 60% plus of this money being spent in FY 2010 and later constitutes immediate economic stimulus.

Come on...you're not going to argue that the Republicans are displaying a lack of bipartisanship and give the Democrats a free pass, are you?

If so, you're as intellectually dishonest as Pete is.
 
Difficult to explain basic economics to someone who refuses to think. Basically, EVERY civilized nation from Rome onward TAXED its citizens to build revenue, SPENT that revenue on public works and the military, and PRINTED money out of usually worthless metal to create a single barter system. And they became prosperous. There is your answer, but I'm sure you still refuse to get it, it's way too much fun to disconnect your brain and pretend you know everything, isn't it?

What stunning irony watching this level of arrogant condescension coming from someone as profoundly ignorant of basic economics they defy the rules of gravity.

Carry on. :roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom